Background
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) introduced new rules on whip use in both Flat and National Hunt horseracing back on the tenth of October. 7 strikes for the duration of a flat race and 8 for a jumps; stipulating a maximum of only 5 inside the final furlong or after the final obstacle for respective codes. This nearly halved the whip use allowance. The BHA also introduced stiff penalties with jockeys breaking the rules losing their riding fee and a substantial percentage of their prize-money.
1 The Initial Perception Problem
Perception amongst the public was singled out as the main reason for the changes. Herein lies the crux of the problem for me. I don’t believe there was a problem with the perception of the sport. One could argue things have never been better in terms of decent attendances and a golden era for thoroughbreds, poor prize-money and funding aside. It seems as if the BHA were worried about those who may never like horseracing, no matter how much educating, pleasing or pandering. You won’t change them. Some of these people would have the sport banned not to mind the whip if they had their way. I’ve heard the rugby and soccer analogy used, certain fans of one just cannot find enjoyment in the other. Sean Boyce makes my case a little more eloquently
Some speculate that the Grand National was the catalyst of the Horseracing authority feeling they had to react. Again I cannot understand why. Jason Maguire’s aggressive use of the air foam cushioned whip had people outraged apparently. 8 million people watched the National on the BBC, out of which 8 people complained of the whip use on the winner. More complained about Clare Balding’s poor humour post-race with 2010 winning jockey Liam Treadwell, commenting on his teeth, saying how he could now afford a new set! The 2011 GN was a strange day, unseasonably warm, with some horses finishing very tired. A combination of connections showering their horses with buckets of water to cool them down and a stricken horse covered by the cameras for all to see left a bad taste. The whip was merely something for some to vent frustration at the race not being its usual brilliant spectacle.
2 The Whip itself
New whips in Britain by law and by choice are air foam cushioned whips. Described best by the Guardians Greg Wood where he let a professional flat jockey, Jim Crowley hit him as hard as he could and it didn’t hurt. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/oct/18/jockeys-whip-didnt-hurt The whip makes a good thwack noise; it is nearly more effective than the impact itself. The whip once used in the correct areas is not cruel, in fact does not hurt the horse. It merely adds motivation to the thoroughbred to continue with its efforts, to reach its full potential and stay on a straight path. Barry Geraghty on Irish radio describes it well when comparing it to a farmer clapping behind a flock a sheep, simply to encourage and direct them. http://media.todayfm.com/podcast/32943/
Jockeys by their nature are some of the best horsemen and women in the world. They care most about the animals. They are there to feed it first thing, clean its bedding, exercise them, make sure they’re healthy, groom them and care for them Saturdays, Sundays or Christmas Day. Hence why would they abuse them? They know their limitations but they also know their ability. They love the sport, are highly competitive but all the while aware that the horse is king.
3 Common Sense and Objectivity is out the window
Ryan Moore gave a fantastic interview, although quite depressing to RUK last week where he made a great point. One strike of the whip can be cruel in certain circumstances while 12 or 13 hits can be perfectly acceptable in a different scenario.
This is a very important point. I believe you will only prevent wrong doing or ‘cruelty’ by being subjective and not completely objective as these rules have become.
4 The Jockeys Aid or Pro Cushion is a vital safety tool
If the debate allows that the sport has animal welfare at its heart, then those debating must recognise that the whip (for the want of a better name, now that we’re hung up on perception) is a vital aid. Whilst galloping flat out it helps keep the horse straight. It motivates the horse to do what the jockey sees best for the pair of them than putting either in danger. Examples of this can be seen before jumping obstacles, discouraging refusals. Some horses like some humans are lazy and need encouragement to go out on another circuit for example. All these points are made in the acceptance that jockeys have what’s best for the horse as paramount. The jockey will pull a horse up if it’s too tired or distressed, put his/her whip down if their chance is gone and ride hands and heels if the horse is already responding to pressure and giving its maximum. However the competitive nature of the great sport, the will to win and maximise each thoroughbred’s potential, along with the fact that these animals have been fed, watered, housed, cared for and trained meticulously to reach these heights, means jockeys can ask for maximum output as they know it will be forthcoming.
5 BHA back down but not enough
It is unfortunate the way in which some jockeys and trainers endorsed the new whip rules when they first came in, notably Frankie Dettori and AP McCoy. That was a mistake. What was unforgiveable was the timing of the introduction of the new rules by the BHA, a week before Champions Day at Ascot, with no trial period. Bans flowed from day 1. Frustratingly some jockeys started to incur bans for hitting their mounts 6 times in the final furlong. Most high profile of these was Richard Hughes, done twice in a week losing out on fees, prize-money and a lengthy ban excluding him from the Breeders Cup. Hughes promptly handed in his license at Kempton after the 2nd ban in protest to what he described unworkable rules, particularly finding fault with the last furlong ‘5’ and the hefty punishment.
Something was going to be done I’d imagine to tweak the rules as Hughes applied the necessary pressure to ramp up the jockeys cause. The straw that broke the camel’s back however was Christophe Soumillon’s ban and loss of prize-money for winning the Champion Stakes on Cirrus Des Aigles. The famous 6 strikes struck again in the final furlong. In none of the above cases did the rides look ugly or cruel. Simply the objective nature of the rules ruling out common sense.
After a meeting between the BHA, Professional Jockeys Association and some respected jockeys and John Gosden, the BHA after a few days deliberation eliminated the 5 after the final flight/ in the final furlong rule, tweaked the punishments in that fees are kept and prize-money is forfeited after more serious breaches of the rules. These got minor offenders like Soumillon back their share of prize-money and Hughes to return to the saddle with the prospect of riding in the Breeders Cup renewed.
The authority had seen some sense, possibly stemmed the flow of anger and injustice felt in the flat weighing room but the national hunt stakeholders remained seriously suspect.
6 The can of worms is well and truly open
Oh dear. What have we started? I stated we hadn’t a perception problem. We are motoring towards one now however. Hughes hadn’t got home from Kempton before Big Mac was wheeled on to Sky Sports News to air his opinions on behalf of the racing industry. Cruelty, ban it altogether was the crux of his message. What a liability to the game he really is. People defend him saying he is consistent, bullshit. He is consistently tabloid, sensational and selfish in his pursuit of celebrity. Meanwhile we are having a balanced debate within our own sport on the likes of Attheraces and Racing UK, the communication to the broader media at the start was a disaster. Jockeys threatening to strike to strike their horses more, disagreement within the sport, angry outbursts after races and light have been shed on the whip rather than the racing itself.
The debate has now started on whether the jockey who breaks the rules that their horse should be disqualified altogether. In theory this makes some sense, in practice it would be anarchy. It is such a sticky, tedious debate which will run and run. I long for the old rules and them to be enforced with harsher penalties. It is even been said that this may make the parliament for MP’s to discuss. Oh dear God no.
The objective manner in which the rules now states 7/8 hits for both codes maximum in my opinion will cause most issue down the line. They have given the objectors to whip and our sport a platform. If 7 is manageable why not make it 6, why not 5, 4 and so on. It has given the no whip believers a solid footing to argue for no hits at all. The new rules risk the competitive nature of the sport itself.
During this media blitz of the whip and it's purpose in racing, jockeys like Kieran Fox do not help the cause by not only not trying to ride to the new rules but nearly breaking the old one's. Twice in a week he was banned for hitting his mount 11 times. No excuse for such whip offences in the current climate especially.
I have no answers to the new storm horseracing finds itself in. No real compromise. I would like to go back to the start. This is not possible, nor will the BHA backtrack that far. Not while the world is watching, and especially those who wish for nothing but the sport’s demise.
7 The National Hunt problem
Stiff obstacles, 3 miles plus, long run in’s and going out past the stable yard for the last time. The whip is much needed in times of encouragement for the winter months ahead. Used in a responsible manner the whip is an integral part of motivating thoroughbreds’ to the test that National Hunt provides. 8 uses of the whip in some cases is simply not enough. Some are reminded at the start to jump off, some get detached early and need encouragement to stay in touch, to concentrate on the jumping and to finish in the best possible position that their ability allows them.
Fontwell on Thursday 27th October was not your usual competitive fare. They were strung out like the washing. Softer ground and stiffer tests of stamina brought out the shortcomings in this rule. None more so than Wherrimon’s success in the 3m 2f Handicap Chase. He was an enthusiastic horse, raced on the bridle, handled the underfoot conditions well and won comfortably. His only danger as it turned out was Ballygulleen. A lazy sort, he needed use of the whip on numerous occasions to keep him motivated, to go past the stable yard out onto another circuit and to jump the fences in an efficient manner as he was capable. His jockey however ran out of his allocation of 8 strikes at the top of the straight. He had already become detached due to sparing use of the jockey’s motivational aid. Clear 2nd at the time, galloping although not at all quickly, not exhausted either, Ballygulleen refused at the 2nd last. Very nearly causing harm to both himself and his jockey. Once again Sean Boyce of ATR was on the same wave length with this clear example of the rules not being sufficient.
Ballygulleen would have finished in my opinion in 2nd, not distressed, not harmed but tired after a tough day’s work, in which he had been trained for months. Horses cannot think for themselves in terms out where to run, how hard and for how long. It is up to the jockey’s to keep them motivated while having their best interests at heart. A horse will however say when enough is enough. But to reach their potential they are obviously to be tested to rather large heights.
8 The whip rule that laid the golden egg?
Forgive me but in the short term can we make money with these unreasonable rules. I feel there is only room for manoeuvre in National Hunt. The whip rules are probably not altogether fair but now nearer the mark than its sister code.
Horses that raced prominently, enthusiastically and tenaciously in a finish will excel over longer distances and soft ground due to the new dimension and added variable the constraints of the 8 hits may have. These types will do better than maybe their initial price or chance suggested.
Buying Distances maybe the way forward. In small fields, soft ground with cards containing extreme distances backing over the combined finishing lengths. Over 57 lengths at Fontwell was 7/4 with a leading bookmaker on Thursday. That was covered let’s just say, without the use of the stick! 15 horses pulled up while 1 refused. Many winners won by long distances and it was largely uncompetitive. This may become a sad trend. Is it one however that we can make a few bob in the meantime. We’ll try.
I haven’t been quick to scribe about the current whip debate, or farce, or debacle, or whip gate, etc. etc. I didn’t hold a very strong opinion either way. It has got significantly stronger however over time. Please let racing trust itself to know we have a great sport. We are kings when it comes to welfare of the horse. Don’t worry about converting the unconvertible.
Post by Peter Kingston
This is no clear cut subject. One of very many opinions. Feel free to share them below.
No comments:
Post a Comment